When an umpire makes one bad decision against your team, you accept it as human error and move on…..may be if he makes a 2nd one you feel hes just having a bad day…..but 13 bad decisions against one team…..and these r no silly decisions.

2- 3rd ODI – Afridi being referred after being originally given not out…..Afridi could have made a big difference in that innings as we all know.He was 34(29). Pakistan were 185-6 and had 11 overs to go and no power play taken. pakistan only made 242 in the end.

3- 3rd ODI – Luke Wright given not out stumped – england were 178-5 at that stage with only another 64 needed. Wright finished on 48 not out.

4- 1st ODI – Trott was on 26 when Billy Doctrove missed an edge of Ajmal – He went on to make 69.5- 2nd ODI – Strauss Nicked Umar Gul, Caught by Kamran Akmal – 38* at the time – Strauss went on to make 126 and win England the match.

7- 5th ODI – Doctrove calling Shoaib for a wide (hilarious) – penalty one run against Shoaibs Name (could be costly later on in life when pundits mull over strike rates etc)

8- 2nd ODI – Afridi LBW not given against Trott – Trott finished on 53. score went from 114-1 to 189 before he got out.9- 2nd ODI – Hafeez LBW not give against Trott – Didnt cost anything for once as prat got himself run out on the same ball.

10- 3rd ODI – Mohammed Yousuf LBW – FLAT Batting Track – given out on 16 off 22…..who knows what would have happened had he stayed. Pakistan only made 241.

Pak team up against 13 players!!!

Watch English Umpires Match Fixing Videos Against Pakistan. Horrible decisions being made against Pakistan and mistakes aren’t done with so much frequency at this highest level. Must Watch Videos.

Share this with Friends and everyone so the true face of the English Cricket Board and their Umpires is revealed. Will there be any inquire into this one? I am afraid not and it will just go into the history as another Umpiring Error(s) and will be burried in the pages of the history. Very Sad when we see discrimination at this highest level and in a game which is called a “Gentlemen’s Game”.

Developments related to military and security matters in Europe and Asia have been numerous this month and condensed into less than a week of meetings, statements and initiatives on issues ranging from missile shield deployments to the unparalleled escalation of the world’s largest war and from a new security system for Europe to a new Russian military doctrine.

A full generation after the end of the Cold War and almost that long since the breakup of the Soviet Union, the past week’s events are evocative of another decade and another century. Twenty or more years ago war in Afghanistan and controversial missile placements in Europe were current news in a bipolar world.

Twenty years afterward, with no Soviet Union, no Warsaw Pact and a greatly diminished and truncated Russia, the United States and NATO have militarized Europe to an unprecedented degree – in fact subordinating almost the entire continent under a Washington-dominated military bloc – and have launched the most extensive combat offensive in South Asia in what is already the longest war in the world.

Of 44 nations in Europe and the Caucasus (excluding microstates and the NATO pseudo-state of Kosovo), only six – Belarus, Cyprus, Malta, Moldova, Russia and Serbia – have escaped having their citizens conscripted by NATO for deployment to the Afghan war front. That number will soon shrink yet further.

Of those 44 countries, only two – Cyprus and Russia – are not members of NATO or its Partnership for Peace transitional program and Cyprus is under intense pressure to join the second.

On February 4 and 5 all 28 NATO defense chiefs met for two days of deliberations in Istanbul, Turkey which concentrated on the war in Afghanistan, the bloc’s military deployment in Kosovo and accelerated plans for expanding a world-wide interceptor missile system to Eastern Europe and the Middle East. That gathering followed by eight days a two-day meeting of the NATO Military Committee in Brussels which included 63 military chiefs from NATO nations and 35 Troop Contributing Nations, as the bloc designates them, including the top military commanders of Israel and Pakistan. That conference focused on the Afghan war and NATO’s new Strategic Concept to be officially formalized at an Alliance summit later this year.

The commander of all 150,000 U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, attended both two-day meetings. Pentagon chief Robert Gates presided over the second and “Afghanistan and missile defense are examples of the new priorities that Gates wants NATO to focus on.” [1]

As indicated by the number of Chiefs of Defense Staff in attendance at the Brussels meetings – 63 – NATO’s reach has been extended far beyond Europe and North America over the past decade. Troops serving under the bloc’s command in Afghanistan come from every inhabited continent, the Middle East and Oceania: Australia has the largest non-member contingent with over 1,500 soldiers, and other non-European nations like Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Colombia, Egypt, Georgia, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea and the United Arab Emirates have troops in Afghanistan or on the way there.

On the day the Istanbul NATO defense ministers meeting began Romanian President Traian Basescu announced that he had granted the Obama administration’s request to base U.S. interceptor missiles in his nation, following by five weeks the news that U.S. Patriot anti-ballistic missiles would be stationed in a part of Poland a half hour drive from Russia’s westernmost border.

The next day, February 5, which marked two months since the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) between the U.S. and Russia regulating the reduction of nuclear weapons and delivery systems expired, [2] the Russian Interfax news agency announced that “President Dmitry Medvedev has endorsed Russia’s military doctrine and basic principles of its nuclear deterrence policy in the period up to 2020….” [3]

The same source cited Security Council Deputy Secretary and former Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces Yury Baluyevsky commenting on the new doctrine: “It is planned to develop the ground, sea, and aerial components of the nuclear triad….Russia needs to guarantee its consistent democratic development using such a stability guarantor as nuclear weapons, as a form of strategic deterrence….Russia reserves the right to use nuclear weapons only if its very existence as a state is endangered.” [4]

Commentary in the Indian daily The Hindu specified that “The doctrine details 11 external military threats to Russia, seven of which are traced to the West. NATO´s eastward expansion and its push for a global role are identified as the number one threat to Russia.”

The feature added: “The U.S. is the source of other top threats listed in the doctrine even though the country is never mentioned in the document. These include attempts to destabilise countries and regions and undermine strategic stability; military build-ups in neighbouring states and seas; the creation and deployment of strategic missile defences, as well as the militarisation of outer space and deployment of high-precision non-nuclear strategic systems.”

Regarding the timing of the authorization of Russia’s new military strategy, the report connected it with recent U.S. missile shield decisions and the START talks between Washington and Moscow still dragging on.

“The new defence doctrine was signed into law and published a day after Romania announced plans to deploy U.S. interceptor missiles as part of a global missile shield fiercely opposed by Russia. Earlier reports said the Kremlin had been holding back the doctrine, prepared last year, because it did not want to jeopardise talks with the U.S. on a new nuclear arms pact that are still going on.” [5]

A similar observation was made in a report from China’s Xinhua News Agency:

“Analysts say the Romanian decision came at a crucial moment when Washington and Moscow are about to sign a successor document to the expired Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START-1). Therefore, the move may upset the thawing Russia-U.S. relations and put their bilateral ties to test.” [6]

KARACHI: It is an undeniable fact that, mostly, the real talent in sports comes from the poor strata of the society.

Pakistan’s sports history is laden with numerous examples where youngsters, who are brought up in an appalling economic environment with no proper nourishment, equipment, and facilities, are able to carve their niche in international circuit mainly due to their amazing willpower and determination.

Khan family in squash, majority of star cricketers, major chunk of hockey Olympians in the country, footballers, boxers and athletes, who earned international repute, mostly, came from the poor families.

It is not strange in the country like ours, where sports is considered a least important faculty, player with an astounding talent performs amazingly at the international level.

Another star in the name of Naseem Hameed pricked the conscience of the dead authorities on Monday, when she turned out to be a queen of the athletic track of the Bangabandhu National Stadium in Dhaka where she emerged as the fastest woman of South Asia by clocking 11.81 seconds in the 100m sprint of the South Asian Games.

This was the career-best feat of the Karachi-based athlete, who was also part of the bronze medallist 4×100m relay team of the country in the 10th South Asian Games held in Colombo in 2006. Read more of this post

Islamabad—Even as India and Pakistan were actively engaged in laying a framework for normalizing their relations in the aftermath of Operation Parkaram (Dec 2001 – Oct 2002), RAW’s Counter Intelligence Team – X (CIT-X), assigned to conduct subversive operations targeting Pakistan was working relentlessly to destabilize the country. According to well placed sources the details of these plans came to light once a copy of the classified document detailing these activities was accidentally lost and became available for public scrutiny.

The strategy to advance the interaction with Pakistan on the diplomatic channels, while perpetrating acts of terrorism on a parallel track, was envisaged after the failure of Indian spell of coercive diplomacy vis-à-vis Pakistan during the Premiership of Atal Bihari Vajpaee. The document lays out the extensive espionage network dovetailed into the diplomatic missions in Central Asia, particularly Afghanistan, and Middle East which the Indian under cover intelligence operatives utilize to rake trouble not only in FATA but in Pakistani hinterland as well.

As per details given in the purloined paper, agents for anti-Pakistan subversion were trained in 57 training camps established in the IHK, East Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Karnataka and Assam. Activists of anti Pakistan nationalist groups were the focus of Indian search for recruits who received cash weapons and ammunitions from undercover RAW operatives masquerading as Al Qaeda agents. While sections of the Taleban have been named as perpetrators of some of the most heinous and bloody acts of subversion in Pakistan, it were their Indian handlers who manipulated the invisible strings. Mossad’s tactics of infiltrating Palestinian resistance acted as model and provided the modus operandi for CIT – X to stir insurgency on Pakistan’s Western border that, hitherto fore, had remained free from a military threat.

Apart from concentrating on the FATA Region, stoking the fires of sub-national movements in Pakistan can be identified as one of the vulnerable area where Indian Agencies are focused; reveals the document. Targeting interior regions of Sind province, Seraiki belt and the Northern Areas of Pakistan forms pivots of the Indian plan, receiving riveting and ceaseless attention of CIT – X , reveals the classified document.
CIT “X” OPERATIONS

1. A declassified document of RAW has revealed CIT ‘X’ Operations which spells out the Mossad / RAW / CIA plot against Pakistan Indicating that Pakistan has been effectively engaged in for a long hot summer as the “Summer Offensive Continues”. Following contents are the proof that Pakistan has been looking for:-

a. Tactics of the Dragon Policy. In retaliation to the alleged unending terrorist pursuits of Pakistan, RAW and MOSSAD had conceived the “Summer Offensive” a year ago. Modus operandi has been successful. The operational tactics are:-

(1) Intelligence has successfully tapped known international drug and mafia dons against Pakistan. CIT “X” is effectively training agents for covert operations in Pakistan. Under the Vajpayee government, the CIT “X” and other sensitive organizations were authorized to strengthen contacts with sleeping agents, and recruit new front men to carry out covert operations in Pakistan.

(2) All possible international criminal and mercenaries, including Afghans were engaged for covert purpose during LK Advani’s tenure in the Home Ministry. CIT “X” is actively involved in drug trafficking to finance its covert operations.

(3) Illegal poppy is being cultivated in bulk in Himachal Pradesh, Arunchal Pradesh, Mizoram and Uttar Pradesh. Drug barons have close links with their Afghan counterparts, completely controlled, and continuously monitored by various intelligence agencies. India today stands as the fifth largest country in the world in the production of illicit opium. Laos is 4th with 20 metric tons and has directly tied up with RAW and internal drug barons. Some people of Indian origin living in Surinam and Holland have been engaged to facilitate Indian agencies in drug trafficking. Under the benign patronage of CIT “X” the business of drug trafficking is flourishing and the money earned is accounted for and is being directed towards covert activities in Pakistan.

b. Offensive under Diplomatic Cover (The MOSSAD Hands)

(1) RAW Centers at London, Dubai, Iran, and South Africa operate against Pakistan jointly with Israeli MOSSAD. However, for its summer offensive RAW in a joint effort with MOSSAD has laid out a whole network around Pakistan to ensure success through destabilization.

(2) During Wana operations the miscreants were fed cash, weapons and ammunition indirectly by RAW operatives under cover of Al-Qaeda. Mossad and AMMAN have also contributed heavily towards the funding and material requirements for those operations.

c. Ministry of Information and Security (Iran’s Involvement)

(1) Iran, having contiguous borders with Pakistan, is a hot bed of intrigues and constant source of support and inspiration to RAW functionaries. The Indian Embassy at Tehran and Consulates in Zahidan, Mashhad and Bandar Abbas are actively engaged in establishing links with disgruntled elements of Balochistan and Sindh for destabilizing these provinces. RAW is maintaining contacts / their sources / links in Pakistan through their consulates at Zahidan and Dubai. Most of the staff at Indian Consulate in Zahidan is from intelligence / security organizations including RAW, Intelligence Bureau and Military Intelligence. Irani intelligence has been providing reliable information and support to RAW operations by using disgruntled Shia elements in Pakistan.

d. Intelligence Model

(1) This intelligence model is an improvement on the practices of MOSSAD, which has infiltrated several Jewish agents into the occupied territory of Palestine as Muslims. These agents practice Islam like any ordinary Muslim. Mingle into local Muslim population just to wait for the appropriate time to strike. While Taliban and Al-Qaeda are getting the blame and Pakistan gets the rap for “not doing enough” by US and FRIENDLY” Afghan authorities

e. UAE Angle

(1) UAE is being used as a launching pad for terrorist activities in Pakistan. Agents are getting hold of young, disgruntled elements and after carrying out their proper brainwashing, they are dispatched to Dubai. Indian Consulate in Dubai is issuing temporary passport to these activists for getting training / briefing. After completion of their formal training, they are launched into Pakistan to carry out their terrorist / sabotage activities.

f. Fake Currency

(1) To cripple the economy of Pakistan, RAW has taken it upon itself the responsibility of pumping fake currency into Pakistan through various illegal means.

g. Subversion

(1) To fan flames of Sindhi Desh Movement subversive literature, published from Bombay and Jammu e.g. Sindh Sujag. Sindh Rises, Sindh Parcham, Sangat and lot of other subversive material is being pumped into Sindh clandestinely. Whereas, RAW is morally and maerially supporting the Saraiki Movement in southern Punjab. Regional Political Parties like Saraiki Suba Mahaz, Pakistan Saraiki Party and Saraiki Sahaliya Sangam are being effectively sponsored. Subversive literature in huge quantity is being published on the subject.

h. Balwaristan Movement

(1) RAW is also involved in sponsoring Balwaristan Movement. It is being organized under Abdul Hamid, self styled Chairman of his own faction of Balwaristan National Front based in Delhi. The Front is working for the independence of Northern Areas. It has been sending into Pakistan a highly subversive material from abroad.

2. The hostile intelligence operatives are making concerted / unified attempts to achieve their aim of destabilizing Pakistan through a well conceived / articulated plan. Pakistan needs to counter it by utilizing all means available.

Rick Rozoff | Twelve months ago a new U.S. administration entered the White House as the world entered a new year.

Two and a half weeks later the nation’s new vice president, Joseph Biden, spoke at the annual Munich Security Conference and said “it’s time to press the reset button and to revisit the many areas where we can and should be working together with Russia.”

Incongruously to any who expected a change in tact if not substance regarding strained U.S.-Russian relations, in the same speech Biden emphasized that, using the “New World Order” shibboleth of the past generation at the end, “Two months from now, the members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization will gather to celebrate the 60th year of this Alliance. This Alliance has been the cornerstone of our common security since the end of World War II. It has anchored the United States in Europe and helped forge a Europe whole and free.” [1]

Six months before, while Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he rushed to the nation of Georgia five days after the end of the country’s five-day war with Russia as an emissary for the George W. Bush administration, and pledged $1 billion in assistance to the beleaguered regime of former U.S. resident Mikheil Saakashvili.

To demonstrate how serious Biden and the government he represented were about rhetorical gimmicks like reset buttons, four months after his Munich address Biden visited Ukraine and Georgia to shore up their “color revolution”-bred heads of state (outgoing Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko is married to a Chicagoan and former Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush official) in their anti-Russian and pro-NATO stances.

While back in Georgia he insisted “We understand that Georgia aspires to join NATO. We fully support that aspiration.”

In Ukraine he said “As we reset the relationship with Russia, we reaffirm our commitment to an independent Ukraine, and we recognize no sphere of influence or no ability of any other nation to veto the choices an independent nation makes,” [2] also in reference to joining the U.S.-dominated military bloc. Biden’s grammar may have been murky, but his message was unmistakeably clear.

Upon his return home Biden gave an interview to the Wall Street Journal, the contents of which were indicated by the title the newspaper gave its account of them – “Biden Says Weakened Russia Will Bend to U.S.” – and which were characterized by the Center for Strategic and International Studies as “the most critical statements from a senior administration official to date vis-a-vis Russia.” [3]

It took the Barack Obama government eight months to make its first friendly gesture to Russia. In September of last year the American president and Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced that they were abandoning the Bush administration’s plan to station ten ground-based midcourse interceptor missiles in Poland in favor of a “stronger, smarter, and swifter” alternative.

The new system would rely on the deployment of Aegis class warships equipped with SM-3 (Standard Missile-3) missiles – with a range of at least 500 kilometers (310 miles) – which “provide the flexibility to move interceptors from one region to another if needed,” [4] in Gates’ words.

The first location for their deployment will be the Baltic Sea according to all indications.

The proximity of Russia’s two largest cities, St. Petersburg and Moscow, especially the first, to the Baltic coast makes the basing of American warships with interceptor missiles in that sea the equivalent of Russia stationing comparable vessels with the same capability in the Atlantic Ocean near Delaware Bay, within easy striking distance of New York City and Washington, D.C.

Although Washington canceled the earlier interceptor missile plans for Poland, on January 20 the defense ministry of that country announced that not only would the Pentagon go ahead with the deployment of a Patriot Advanced Capability-3 anti-ballistic missile battery in the country, but that it would be based on the Baltic Sea coast 35 miles from Russia’s Kaliningrad district. [5]

The previous month Viktor Zavarzin, the head of the Defense Committee of the Russian State Duma (the lower house of parliament), said “Russia is concerned with how rapidly new NATO members are upgrading their military infrastructure” and “that Russia was especially concerned with the reconstruction of air bases in the Baltic countries for NATO’s purposes which include signal and air intelligence radio of Russian territory.” [6]

As it should be.

Since the Baltic Sea nations of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania were ushered into NATO as full members in 2004, warplanes from Alliance member states have shared four-month rotations in patrolling the region, with two U.S. deployments to date.

Shortly before the patrols began almost six years ago the Russian media reported that “Relations between Russia and Estonia have been tense ever since NATO built a radar station on the Russian-Estonian border last year. On March 23, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Yakovenko warned Russia would retaliate ‘if NATO planes fly over Russian borders after the Baltic nations join the alliance.'” [7]Read more of this post

According to the latest statistics available, Islam is spreading at a fast pace especially in America, Europe, India and Russia. The Crescent North refers to the rise of Islamic forces from Turkey, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Russia, and Central Asia. Islamic conquerors like Tam-erlane, Sultan Bayazid Yild-irim, Khairuddin Barbarossa, Ghauri and Ghaznavi who changed the course of history belonged to this area. The west confused by the rise of militant Islam in the Middle East has initiated a ‘Long War’ by triggering a Shia-Sunni conflict based on the Iraqi model; not realising that recent history has already set in motion the winds of change, with epoch-making consequences, this time coming from the steppes of Asia or the Crescent North.

The Long War was initiated to achieve multiple objectives, with initial foothold in Afghanistan and Iraq. The ultimate aim of the US and west was to create divisions in the Islamic world and get hold of the hydrocarbon hub of Caspian and the Middle East in order to continue exercising dominance over China and the rest of the world. Indiscriminate bombing of Iraq and Afghanistan and the penetration of intelligence and mercenary agencies, like Blackwater, into Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan to create chaos in these countries and spread confusion between various Islamic sects was a clever ploy to support this so-called Long War.

Iraq has already become an example for the entire Arab world. Every day bomb blasts in Shia and Sunni communities lead to violence between them. The agenda is to break-up Iraq into three countries – Kurdistan is one of them. This might ca-use anarchy whose impact would be felt in the wider Arab world. Knowing that sectarian violence can even lead to a war-like situation between Shias and Sunnis, the west wants to adopt this strategy to gain time and survive by vainly trying to improve their demo-graphics in the next 50 years. But they seems to have forgotten that all the major invasions of Europe came from the northeast, most of them from Central Asia and Turkey.

Now, the NATO forces have already started a new agenda in occupied countries in which the US army is playing a vital role. They are all focusing on Pakistan to destabilise and break it up. But thanks to Allah, we are still standing as one nation. The US/NATO forces have lost the war in Afghanistan and are leaving behind small crackers in the region. In the past 10 years, things have totally changed. While America and allies have been dividing and demoralising Islam by the media and military power in the Middle East and North Africa, things in the north have started to get in favour of Islam.

Qolşärif mosque - The largest mosque in Russia, Kazan

The future rise of Islam will come from Russia. Paul Goble (a specialist on ethnic minorities in the Russian Federation) has predicted that within the next few decades, Russia will become a Muslim majority state. This situation has alarmed the Russians as well as western leaders; today Russia has about 8,000 mosques while 15 years back there were only 300. According to statistics, by the end of 2015, the number of mosques in Russia will cross the figure of 25,000. Most alarming of all for the Russians and the west is: “By 2015, Muslims will make up a majority of Russia’s conscript army.” Russia’s white population is declining, but the Muslim population is growing at a fast pace. And in 2030 to 2040 its population will, most likely, have a big majority of Muslims.

The Turks also are abandoning the western culture, as their government focuses more on good relations with Muslim countries. The Israel-Gaza conflict has further strained relations between Turkey and the west. The degree of change in the Turkish public opinion during the Gaza conflict, and the scale of criticism of Israel that was manifest in popular demonstrations, may suggest that Turkish-Israeli and Turkish-western relations have been seriously damaged. The Turkish people support Islamic trends and culture. In the past years they have developed their economy at a tremendous rate. Politically, they have become more conscious of their Muslim identity; Turkey was the only Muslim country whose prime minister visited Azad Kashmir in Pakistan.

Afghanistan, another Muslim country, is already at war with the allied forces and the Afghan Taliban have pinned down the US/NATO forces. Today there are more US and NATO casualties in Afghanistan than ever before. Surprisingly these simple people have defeated two big superpowers of the world within a span of three decades. In this backdrop and the well conceived saying, “Afghanistan is the graveyard of superpowers”, America today has started to initiate peace talks with the Taliban.

The flag of Pakistan is meant to represent the country's Islamic heritage with its use of the crescent and star against a dark green background.

Last but not the least comes Pakistan, a country at war, a country facing economic crisis, a country with power shortages, a country full of corruption, and a country having problems in managing its resources. But it is a nuclear power, produces 10 percent of the world’s food, has the most efficient Islamic army, has millions of patriots and has the identity of being the fortress of Islam. Despite the nexus of Indo-US-Israel and 20 to 30 members of NATO to support terrorism in Pakistan; it is still standing.

Today Pakistan is at centre stage of the Crescent North. The rise of Pakistan will be seen when the US and its allies exit Afghanistan. The Taliban will again form government and lay the foundation of real AfPak. Yes, there will be an AfPak; but quite different from the western agenda. The two countries could move towards forming a confederation-like alliance. Hopefully, it will be a regional power of the next decade and may merge into the North Crescent to assume a bigger role.

The best course for Muslims of the world is to come to the right path of Islam. The west must stop roaming around in the south; if it really wants a challenge, it should visit the north where the crescent revolution is taking shape. by Umar Waqar

Rick Rozoff | Afghanistan is occupying center stage at the moment, but in the wings are complementary maneuvers to expand a string of new military bases and missile shield facilities throughout Eurasia and the Middle East.

The advanced Patriot theater anti-ballistic missile batteries in place or soon to be in Egypt, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Israel, Japan, Kuwait, the Netherlands, Poland, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Taiwan, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates describe an arc stretching from the Baltic Sea through Southeast Europe to the Eastern Mediterranean Sea and the Caucasus and beyond to East Asia. A semicircle that begins on Russia’s northwest and ends on China’s northeast.

Over the past decade the United States has steadily (though to much of the world imperceptibly) extended its military reach to most all parts of the world. From subordinating almost all of Europe to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization through the latter’s expansion into Eastern Europe, including the former Soviet Union, to arbitrarily setting up a regional command that takes in the African continent (and all but one of its 53 nations). From invading and establishing military bases in the Middle East and Central and South Asia to operating a satellite surveillance base in Australia and taking charge of seven military installations in South America. In the vacuum left in much of the world by the demise of the Cold War and the former bipolar world, the U.S. rushed in to insert its military in various parts of the world that had been off limits to it before.

And this while Washington cannot even credibly pretend that it is threatened by any other nation on earth.

It has employed a series of tactics to accomplish its objective of unchallenged international armed superiority, using an expanding NATO to build military partnerships not only throughout Europe but in the Caucasus, the Middle East, North and West Africa, Asia and Oceania as well as employing numerous bilateral and regional arrangements.

The pattern that has emerged is that of the U.S. shifting larger concentrations of troops from post-World War II bases in Europe and Japan to smaller, more dispersed forward basing locations south and east of Europe and progressively closer to Russia, Iran and China.

The ever-growing number of nations throughout the world being pulled into Washington’s military network serve three main purposes.

First, they provide air, troop and weapons transit and bases for wars like those against Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq, for naval operations that are in fact blockades by other names, and for regional surveillance.

Second, they supply troops and military equipment for deployments to war and post-conflict zones whenever and wherever required.

Last, allies and client states are incorporated into U.S. plans for an international missile shield that will put NATO nations and select allies under an impenetrable canopy of interceptors while other nations are susceptible to attack and deprived of the deterrent effect of being able to retaliate.

The degree to which these three components are being integrated is advancing rapidly. The war in Afghanistan is the major mechanism for forging a global U.S. military nexus and one which in turn provides the Pentagon the opportunity to obtain and operate bases from Southeast Europe to Central Asia.

One example that illustrates this global trend is Colombia. In early August the nation’s vice president announced that the first contingent of Colombian troops were to be deployed to serve under NATO command in Afghanistan. Armed forces from South America will be assigned to the North Atlantic bloc to fight a war in Asia. The announcement of the Colombian deployment came shortly after another: That the Pentagon would acquire seven new military bases in Colombia.

When the U.S. deploys Patriot missile batteries to that nation – on its borders with Venezuela and Ecuador – the triad will be complete.

Afghanistan is occupying center stage at the moment, but in the wings are complementary maneuvers to expand a string of new military bases and missile shield facilities throughout Eurasia and the Middle East.

On January 28 the British government will host a conference in London on Afghanistan that, in the words of what is identified as the UK Government’s Afghanistan website, will be co-hosted by Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Afghanistan’s President Karzai and United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and co-chaired by British Foreign Minister David Miliband, his outgoing Afghan counterpart Rangin Spanta, and UN Special Representative to Afghanistan, Kai Eide.

The site announces that “The international community are [sic] coming together to fully align military and civilian resources behind an Afghan-led political strategy.” [1]

The conference will also be attended by “foreign ministers from International Security Assistance Force partners, Afghanistan’s immediate neighbours and key regional player [sic].”

Public relations requirements dictate that concerns about the well-being of the Afghan people, “a stable and secure Afghanistan” and “regional cooperation” be mentioned, but the meeting will in effect be a war council, one that will be attended by the foreign ministers of scores of NATO and NATO partner states.

In the two days preceding the conference NATO’s Military Committee will meet at the Alliance’s headquarters in Brussels, Belgium. “Together with the Chiefs of Defence of all 28 NATO member states, 35 Chiefs of Defence of Partner countries and Troop Contributing Nations will also be present.” [2]

That is, top military commanders from 63 nations – almost a third of the world’s 192 countries – will gather at NATO Headquarters to discuss the next phase of the expanding war in South Asia and the bloc’s new Strategic Concept. Among those who will attend the two-day Military Committee meeting are General Stanley McChrystal, in charge of all U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan; Admiral James Stavridis, chief U.S. military commander in Europe and NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander; Pakistani Chief of the Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and Israeli Chief of General Staff Gabi Ashkenazi.

Former American secretary of state Madeleine Albright has been invited to speak about the Strategic Concept on behalf of the twelve-member Group of Experts she heads, whose task it is to promote NATO’s 21st century global doctrine.

The Brussels meeting and London conference highlight the centrality that the war in Afghanistan has for the West and for its international military enforcement mechanism, NATO.

During the past few months Washington has been assiduously recruiting troops from assorted NATO partnership program nations for the war in Afghanistan, including from Armenia, Bahrain, Bosnia, Colombia, Jordan, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Ukraine and other nations that had not previously provided contingents to serve under NATO in the South Asian war theater. Added to forces from all 28 NATO member states and from Partnership for Peace, Mediterranean Dialogue, Istanbul Cooperation Initiative, Adriatic Charter and Contact Country programs, the Pentagon and NATO are assembling a coalition of over fifty nations for combat operations in Afghanistan.

Almost as many NATO partner nations as full member states have committed troops for the Afghanistan-Pakistan war: Afghanistan itself, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Australia, Austria, Bahrain, Colombia, Egypt, Finland, Georgia, Ireland, Jordan, Macedonia, Mongolia, Montenegro, New Zealand, Pakistan, Singapore, South Korea, Sweden, Ukraine and the United Arab Emirates.

The Afghan war zone is a colossal training ground for troops from around the world to gain wartime experience, to integrate armed forces from six continents under a unified command, and to test new weapons and weapons systems in real-life combat conditions.

Not only candidates for NATO membership but all nations in the world the U.S. has diplomatic and economic leverage over are being pressured to support the war in Afghanistan.

The American Forces Press Service featured a story last month about the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force’s Regional Command East which revealed: “In addition to…French forces, Polish forces are in charge of battle space, and the Czech Republic, Turkey and New Zealand manage provincial reconstruction teams. In addition, servicemembers and civilians from Egypt, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates work with the command, and South Korea runs a hospital in the region.”

With the acknowledgment that Egyptian forces are assigned to NATO’s Afghan war, it is now known that troops from all six populated continents are subordinated to NATO in one war theater. [3]Read more of this post